ANSWER  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  RULES 


BREEDERS'  TROTTING  STOD  ROOK 


ADDRESS  OF  THE  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE 


NATIONAL  ASSOCIATION  OF  TROTTING  HORSE  BREEDERS. 


FRANKFORT,      KY  .  : 

PRINTED     AT     THE     KENTUCKY     YEOMAN     OFFICE. 

MAJOR,   JOHNSTON    &    BARRETT. 

1880. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2009  with  funding  from 

Boston  Library  Consortium  IVIember  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/answerofcommitteOOnati 


ANSWER 


COMMITTEE   ON   RULES 


BREEDERS'  TROITiG  STDD  BOOK 


'  ADDRESS  OF  THE  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE 


NATIONAL  ASSOCIATION  OF  TROTTING  HORSE  BREEDERS, 


FRANKFORT,    KY. 

PRINTED   AT    THE  KENTUCKY   YEOMAN    OFFICE. 

MAJOR,    JOHNSTON    &    BARRETT. 

1880. 


ANSWER. 


It  is  difficult  to  answer,  in  a  dignified  manner,  so  undigni- 
fied a  document  as  the  Address  of  the  Executive  Commit- 
tee of  the  National  Association  of  Trotting  Horse  Breeders; 
and  had  it  not,  by  its  misrepresentations,  directly  impeached 
the  fairness  of  our  motives  in  proposing  rules  for  a  Trotting 
Stud  Book,  and  endeavored  to  hold  our  work  up  to  public 
contempt  and  ridicule,  we  would  have  deemed  it  the  wisest 
course  to  pass  it  by  in  silence.  As  it  is,  we  are  compelled, 
by  a  decent  regard  for  ourselves  and  the  trotting  horse  inter- 
est, to  give  publicity  thus  to  a  simple  statement  of  the  truth 
of  the  case. 

And  at  the  very  outset  let  it  be  borne  in  mind,  that  the 
pamphlet  of  the  National  Association  purports  to  be  pre- 
pared by  a  Committee  appointed  by  their  Executive  Com- 
mittee, and  that  this  Committee  presumably  consisted  of 
Mr.  J.  H.  Wallace,  who  is,  we  believe,  in  reality  the  author 
of  this  Address,  and  should  be  known  as  such.  The 
National  Association  of  Trotting  Horse  Breeders  has  no 
cause  of  quarrel,  nor  do  we  believe  that  its  members  have 
the  slightest  personal  animosity  against  us  or  any  member 
of  our  Committee;  and  our  surprise  was  great  that  its 
Executive  Committee  shcwjld  have  been  betrayed  into 
fathering  a  document  which  reflects  on  us  in  a  manner 
wholly  unwarrantable.  But  when  we  remember  that  their 
Address  is  in  reality  a  Wallace  manifesto,  and  that  Mr. 
Wallace,  who  thinks  that  he  has  a  grievance,  has  adroitly 
put  forward  the  National  Association  to  fight  his  battle, 
we  need  seek  no  further  for  an  explanation  of  their  con- 
duct. 

The  Breeders'  Trotting  Stud  Book  was  stated,  in  its  pros- 
pectus as  issued  by  us,  to  owe  its  origin  to  the  manifest 


want  that  existed  for  an  authoritative  register  on  a  scientific 
basis.  The  breeders  in  Kentucky  have,  for  a  long  time, 
given  much  thought  to  a  standard  for  the  registration  of 
trqtdng  horses,  and  in  October,  1878,  our  numerous  dis- 
cussions on  this  subject  culminated  in  a  set  of  rules — sub- 
stantially those  now  before  the  public,  the  only  difference 
being  an  amendment  to  Rule  IV. 

As  practical  men,  we  were  guided  in  forming  these  rules 
by  our  own  experience,  and  the  experience  of  our  neighbors 
and  our  fathers,  in  estimating  the  value  of  the  running 
horse.  Thorough-bred  colts,  by  a  speed-producing  sire, 
out  of  a  speed-producing  dam,  would  sell  in  open  market 
for  ten  and  twenty  times  as  much  as  colts  by  the  same 
sire  out  of  an  untried  or  7ian-sp6'ed-pvoduc\ng  dam,  no  mat- 
ter how  long  her  pedigree  or  by  how  many  crosses  she 
might  run  to  the  Godolphin  Arabian.  We  believed  that 
the  true  test  of  merit  was  not  how  much  Messenger  blood 
there  might  be  in  a  trotting  bred  horse,  but  how  much 
speed  had  been  produced  by  his  sire  and  by  his  dam.  This 
is  the  fundamental  principle  on  which  our  rules  are  based. 

At  the  meeting  of  the  National  Association  in  November, 
1878,  a  Kentucky  member,  to  whom  these  rules  had  been 
submitted,  called  the  attention  of  the  Association  to  them. 
They  had  been  previously  sent  to  several  gentlemen  in  New 
York,  but  no  publicity  had  been  before  given  to  them.  Not 
wishing  to  undertake  the  publication  of  a  Stud  Book  our- 
selves, we  tendered  its  compilation,  on  the  basis  upon  which 
we  had  settled,  to  Mr.  Wallace;  but  fearing  a  desire  on  his 
part  to  lower  the  standard,  the  offer  was  coupled  with  the 
condition  that  the  rules  should  not  be  amended  except  by 
consent  of  a  self-perpetuating  Committee,  composed  of  H. 
C.  McDowell.  R.  S.  Veech.  L.  Brodhead,  Charles  Back- 
man,  and  I.  V.  Baker,  jr.  Mr.  Wallace  declined  the  offer, 
but  published  the  rules  in  the  March  number  of  his  Monthly, 
spoke  favorably  of  them  ;  but,  as  a  matter  of  course,  he 
thought  he  could  introduce  material  improvements.     This 


5 

he  vainly  attempted  for  several  months.  His  efforts  stim- 
ulated us  in  the  same  direction,  and  a  proof-slip,  containing 
a  provisional  set  of  rules  (one  of  several  of  its  kind  which 
we  had  had  struck),  was  sent  to  the  members  of  our  Com- 
mittee and  a  few  others  for  consideration,  and  with  the 
object  of  exciting  discussion  and  criticism.  This  was  the 
proof  that  Mr.  Wallace  has  led  the  public  to  believe  was 
the  standard  adopted  by  us,  and  which  has  been  called  by 
him  the  "  Pinafore  Standard."  This  set  of  rules  for  admis- 
sion was  disapproved,  in  so  far  as  it  differed  from  that  origi- 
nally adopted,  by  all  of  our  Committee  and  their  associates 
as  soon  as  submitted,  and  was  never  approved  or  adopted. 
T^a^  it  did  not  constitute  our  standard  ivas  ivell  knozim  to  Mr. 
Wallace  when  he  prepared  and  piiblisJied  his  article  on  the 
"Pinafore  Standards  And  this  is  susceptible  of  easy 
demonstration. 

Neither  the  proof-slip  sent  to  Mr.  Wallace  in  February, 
1879,  nor  the  "  Pinafore"  proof-slip  contained  the  names  of 
our  Committee ;  nor  was  that  Committee  formed,  named, 
or  known,  until  just  before  the  publication  of  our  pros- 
pectus and  rules  as  adopted.  Now,  the  only  source  of 
information  that  Mr.  Wallace  could  possibly  have  had,  as 
to  who  composed  our  Committee,  was  the  rules,  as  finally 
adopted,  which  were  signed  by  that  Committee,  published 
in  various  papers,  and  sent  to  Mr.  Wallace  himself  before 
the  publication  of  his  article;  and  yet  that  gentleman,  in 
his  "Pinafore"  editorial,  names  our  Committee,  which  shows 
that  he  must  have  had  before  him  the  accepted  standard  of 
six  rules,  and  then  deliberately  proceeds  to  quote  the  proof- 
slip  of  seven  rules  which  had  never  been  given  to  the  pub- 
lic, and  which  he  knew  had  been  rejected  by  us  as  our 
basis  of  registration,  and  to  devote  several  pages  to  the  rid- 
icule of  that  which  had  no  existence. 

That  Mr.  Wallace  should  be  guilty  of  such  a  mean  decep- 
tion was  a  surprise  to  us,  and  we  have  no  doubt  that  it  will 
be  a  surprise  to  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  National 


Association  that  he  has  made  them,  in  their  Address,  sub- 
stantially reiterate  this  shameless  misstatement.  We  regret 
sincerely  the  loss  of  respect  that  this  occasions  us  to  feel  for 
Mr.  Wallace.  We  felt  compelled  to  allude  to  it  because  this 
article  has  created  very  generally  a  false  impression  as  to 
our  standard,  and  because  it  is  only  one  of  many  misrepre- 
sentations in  this  Address,  as  we  shall  show. 

And  now,  turning  from  the  history  of  our  undertaking 
to  the  criticisms  of  the  National  Association,  we  wish  it,  in 
the  first  place,  distinctly  understood  that  the  impression 
sought  to  be  made  in  its  Address  that  we  were  indebted  to 
Mr.  Wallace  or  the  National  Association,  for  even  so  little 
as  one  thought  that  is  contained  in  our  standard,  is  false. 
On  the  contrary,  the  National  Association  has  appropriated 
from  our  rules  all  that  is  good  in  theirs.  Before  this  Asso- 
ciation heard  of  our  rules,  neither  it  nor  Mr.  Wallace  had 
the  faintest  conception  of  what  should  constitute  a  standard. 
A  careful  reading  of  the  Association's  organ  (Wallace's 
Monthly)  prior  to  November,  1878,  or  even  prior  to  the 
publication  of  our  rules  in  it  (March,  1879),  ^'^^  establish 
this  fact.  And,  in  like  manner,  we  wish  it  as  distinctly 
understood  that  ws  have  never  appropriated,  never  shall 
appropriate,  and  never  intended  to  appropriate  any  of  Mr. 
Wallace's  labor  in  the  compilation  of  our  Stud  Book. 

In  the  second  place,  our  rules  were  framed  without  giv- 
ing a  thought  to  whose  stock  might  or  might  not  be  eligible 
under  them.  The  serious  ground  of  complaint  against  them 
is,  that  the  standard  is  too  high,  and  that  we  "  ostracise  "  some 
of  the  largest  breeding  establishments  in  the  country.  Our 
answer  is,  that  the  horses  embraced  under  this  standard 
will  fill  a  large  volume;  and  as  high  as  the  standard  is,  it 
will  include  many  animals  that  are  not  trotters.  If  large 
breeding  establishments  are  ostracised,  it  is  owing  to  the 
inferiority  of  their  stock — not  to  the  injustice  of  the  rules; 
for  in  their  application  to  our  own  stock,  we  have  found 
that   the    animals  which    are    ineligible    are    invariably  the 


inferior  ones,  and  the  higher  our  estimation  of  an  animal 
was  before  the  determination  of  this  standard,  the  greater 
now  the  number  of  rules  under  which  it  can  claim  entrance. 
Nor  have  we  made  one  standard  for  our  stock,  and  a  differ- 
ent one  for  that  of  others.  The  same  rules  apply  to  the 
whole  country.  If  our  standard  is  not  scientific,  nay,  is  not 
the  best  that  is  adopted,  it  will  not  "ostracise  "  the  stock  of 
any  one.  It  is  folly  to  assert  that,  by  a  standard  on  an  arbi- 
trary basis,  we  could  depreciate  the  stock  of  one  man  and 
enhance  the  value  of  that  of  another.  If  the  National  Asso- 
ciation, or  Mr.  Wallace,  or  any  one  else,  feels  aggrieved  at 
our  action,  they  are  at  perfect  liberty  to  make  a  set  of  rules 
and  publish  a  Stud  Book  that  will  "  ostracise  "  our  stock. 

We  have  published  a  set  of  rules  which,  in  our  judgment, 
and  our  judgment  only,  should  govern  registration  in  a  Trot- 
ting Stud  Book.  We  have  not  demanded  that  the  public 
a[)prove  them,  nor  have  we  denounced  or  accused  of  pre- 
sumption any  who  disagree  with  us.  We  want  one  stand- 
ard; some  of  the  gentlemen  in  New  York  want  another — a 
lower  standard.  They  have  a  perfect  right  to  their  opinion 
on  this  subject,  and  we  claim  the  same  right  for  ourselves. 

We  feel  confident  that  the  course  of  the  National  Associa- 
tion in  characterizing  our  intention  to  publish  a  Trotting 
Stud  Book  a  presumption,  can  meet  with  nothing  but  rid- 
icule from  even  its  most  zealous  partisans.  Has  the  Na- 
tional Association  a  legal  or  a  moral  copy-right  on  the 
compilation  of  Stud  Books?  On  what,  pray,  does  it  base 
its  claims  to  the  exclusive  right  of  compiling  a  Trotting 
Register?  Is  it  on  the  score  of  its  name?  for,  apart  from 
this,  it  can  lay  no  claim  to  a  national  character.  Or  is  it 
on  the  score  of  its  interest  and  success  in  the  breeding  of 
the  trotting  horse?  We  have  no  ambition  to  enter  upon  a 
discussion  of  the  relative  merits  of  any  sections  of  the 
country  in  this  business ;  but  when,  on  a  simple  basis  of 
facts,  we   compare   Kentucky's  position   with    that   of   the 


8 

National  Trotting  Horse  Breeders'  Association,  if  either  is 
to  be  accused  of  presumption,  which  shall  it  be? 

Let  us  call  the  attention  of  our  Eastern  friends  to  the  fact 
that  Kentucky  has  been  presumptuous  enough  to  breed  a 
two-year  old  with  the  best  record  (2:31);  a  three-year  old 
with  the  best  record  (2:233^);  a  four-year  old  with  the  best 
record  (2:19^;)  and  a  five-year  old  with  the  best  record 
(2:18);  and  that  we,  the  members  of  the  Committee,  are 
presumptuous  enough  to  own  more  trotting  horses  eligible 
to  entry,  under  the  highest  standard  yet  announced,  than 
are  owned  by  all  the  members  of  the  National  Breeders' 
Association  combined;  and  we  are  presumptuous  enough 
to  believe  that  we  have  also  bred  more  trotting  horses,  as 
measured  by  the  2:30  list,  than  have  been  bred  by  all  the 
members  of  that  Association  combined.  And  these  are 
some  of  the  facts  that  lead  us  to  presume  that  we  know 
as  nearly  what  standard  is  the  best  as  Mr.  Wallace,  and 
that  our  interest  in  seeing  the  establishment  of  a  just  and 
scientific  standard  of  registration  is  as  lively  as  that  of 
even  the  National  Association. 

But  when  we  have  eliminated  the  sin  of  presumption 
from  out  the  list  of  our  offenses  as  having  too  fictitious  a 
basis  to  be  entertained,  and  endeavor  to  get  at  some  real 
ground  of  objection  on  the  part  of  the  New  York  Asso- 
ciation to  our  standard,  we  find  that  Mr.  Wallace  and  his 
associates  have  abandoned  the  ferocity  of  their  attack  on 
all  of  our  rules,  with  the  exception  of  the  Vlth — the  three- 
cross  rule.  And  since  it  is  not  possible  for  any  intelligent 
individual  to  question  the  intrinsic  merit  of  a  regulation, 
the  lowering  of  which  would  be  but  a  signal  for  the  admis- 
sion of  much  of  the  veriest  trash  the  country  contains,  Mr. 
Wallace,  with  exceeding  bad  taste,  endeavors  to  excite 
odium  against  it  by  alleging  that  its  disastrous  result  is 
to  exclusively  benefit  Woodburn  Farm,  and  particularly  to 
"ostracise"  General  Withers  and  Mr.  Backman. 


One  of  the  strongest  objections  to  our  taking  any  notice 
of  Mr.  Wallace's  pamphlet,  as  we  have  already  said,  was 
the  necessity  that  was  imposed  on  us  of  meeting  him  at 
times  on  his  own  ground,  and  we  beg  leave  to  apologize 
to  Gen.  Withers  and  Mr.  Backman  for  referring  to  them 
thus  particularly  in  a  discussion  which  should  be  based  on 
principles,  not  persons.  Nor  do  we  think  that  the  bitter 
and  rancorous  attack  on  Woodburn  should  be  passed  over 
without  notice  by  such  of  us  as  are  not  connected  with  that 
farm.  Let  us,  first  of  all,  then,  in  a  general  way,  say  that  we 
regard  Woodburn  as  by  far  our  most  formidable  rival ;  but 
that  we  honor  her,  not  only  for  the  high  standard  of  her 
stock,  but  for  the  high  standard  of  fairness  and  integrity 
that  has  characterized  all  of  her  dealings,  from  the  inception 
of  the  enterprise  by  the  late  R.  A.  Alexander  to  the  pres- 
ent time;  but  that  four  rival  breeding  establishments,  con- 
ducted by  men  past  middle  age,  and  who  have  had  more 
than  an  average  success  in  business  enterprises,  should  spend 
their  time  and  means  to  build  up  Woodburn,  at  the  expense 
of  their  own  establishments,  is  indeed  remarkable.  That 
such  has  not  been  our  aim,  will  become  still  more  evident 
when  we  begin  to  consider  the  application  of  our  standard 
to  Mr.  Alexander's  stock. 

The  three-cross  rule  (VI),  which  the  New  York  Associa- 
tion so  severely  denounces,  has  always  been  regarded  by  us 
as  the  weakest  of  our  six,  and  it  was  the  subject  of  no  little 
debate  before  its  adoption.  To  provoke  discussion  among 
ourselves,  our  first  proof-slips  adopted  the  thorough-bred 
standard  of  five  crosses;  but  in  the  end  we  unanimously 
settled  on  three,  but  also  provided  that,  at  a  specified  future 
date,  the  number  should  be  increased.  The  Woodburn 
Catalogue  for  1880  shows  85  animals,  of  which  53  are  eligi- 
ble under  the  rules  as  adopted  by  us,  but  only  5  of  these  are 
dependent  for  entry  on  the  three  cross  ru'e — the  rule  denounced 
as  gotten  up  exclusively  for  the  benefit  of  Woodburn.  Gen. 
Withers  (Catalogue  1880)  has  222  animals,  34  of  which  are 


lO 

eligible,  and  25  of  these  are  ivholly  dependent  on  the  three-cross 
rule  for  admission.  Mr.  Backman  (Catalogue  1878,  the  last 
we  have)  has  iy8  animals,  46  of  which  are  eligible,  and  31 
of  these  are  xvholly  dependent  on  the  three  cross  rule  for  admis- 
sion. Now,  if  the  advancement  of  Woodburn  and  the  ostra- 
cism of  Fair  Lawn  and  Stony  Ford  had  been  our  object, 
let  us  see  how  we  might  have  accomplished  it.  Had  we 
stricken  out  the  three-cross  rule,  or  made  it  a  five  cross  rule, 
Woodburn  would  have  entered  48  animals  out  of  her  85  ; 
Gen.  Withers,  9  out  of  his  222  ;  and  Mr.  Backman,  15  out 
of  his  198.  Have  not  the  gentlemen  in  New  York  allowed 
Mr.  Wallace  to  select  for  them  the  wrong  rule  by  which  to 
show  Woodburn's  supreme  selfishness,  and  would  it  not 
have  been  safer  for  them  to  confine  their  attacks,  in  general 
terms,  to  the  real  and  only  grievance,  to-wit :  that  the  stand- 
ard is  too  high  ?  Nay,  moreover,  if  facts  are  of  any  interest 
to  the  New  York  Association,  would  it  not  be  more  appro- 
priate, considering  that,  whereas  Woodburn  has  only  53 
animals  which  can  be  entered  under  our  rules,  Glen  View 
can  enter  75,  to  call  this  the  "Glen  View  standard  "  rather 
than  the  Woodburn  standard  ? 

Before  leaving  this  subject,  we  feel  compelled  to  allude  to 
a  piece  of  very  sharp  practice  on  the  part  of  the  author  of 
the  Address.  The  catalogue  of  1879  of  Woodburn  shows 
that  there  were  at  Woodburn  86,  not  230  animals,  as  stated 
in  the  Address.  In  stating  the  number  of  animals  owned 
by  Mr.  Backman  and  Gen.  Withers,  the  Address  refers  to 
them  as  so  many  animals  at  Stony  Ford  and  Fair  Lawn  ;  in 
the  case  of  Woodburn,  by  the  use  of  the  words,  "  the  Cata- 
logue shoivs  230  animals,"  the  impression  is  made,  and  that 
intentionally,  that  there  were  230  animals  at  Woodburn, 
This  number  must  have  been  obtained  by  embracing  the 
produce  under  mares,  including  such  as  was  shown  to  be 
sold,  or  by  including  the  dams  and  sires  in  the  pedigrees. 
The  catalogue  shows  clearly  that  but  86  animals  were  at 


IT 

Woodburn.  Would  it  not  be  advisable  to  appoint  a  Board 
of  Censors  to  supervise  the  compilation  of  Addresses? 

And  now,  glancing  at  some  equally  fictitious  objections 
to  our  work,  we  find  that  the  fact  that  we  have  no  Board 
of  Censors  to  superintend  the  compilation  of  our  book,  is 
made  a  ground  of  complaint  in  the  Address.  Our  answer 
is,  that  the  compilation  of  such  a  work  is  necessarily  left 
to  the  Editor,  and  that  the  Board  of  Censors,  appointed  by 
the  National  Association,  were  mere  figure-heads.  Our 
Editor  is  restricted  by  certain  clear  and  definite  rules, 
founded  on  but  one  list  (the  2:30),  and  that  a  well  known 
one.  But  when  we  consider  how  voluminous  and  exceed- 
ingly complicated  the  rules  of  the  National  Association 
are,  and  that  they  require  not  only  a  2:30  list,  but  a  2:35 
hst  to  wagon,  and  a  2:40  list,  a  thing  which  has  no  real  or 
probable  existence,  we  are  surprised  that  the  National 
Association,  if  its  object  is  to  produce  a  reliable  work, 
does  not  institute  an  army  instead  of  a  Board  of  Censors, 
Surely  it  is  astonishing  how  much  cumbersome  rubbish  was 
attached  to  our  rules  in  their  modification  and  amplification 
before  their  adoption  by  the  National  Association. 

There  is  one  other  point  of  difference  to  which  the  Ad- 
dress invites  attention.  The  National  Breeders'  Associa- 
tion requires  a  record  won  under  the  rule  of  National  Trot- 
ting Association. 

"Which  rule  is  as  follows: 

"Any  contest  for  premium,  purse,  stake,  or  zua£-£'r  on  a7iy 
'^course,  and  in  the  presence  of  a  judge  or  judges,  shall 
"constitute  a  public  race." 

The  time  made  in  a  public  race  is  a  record. 

Our  provision  in  regard  to  certificates  is  as  follows  : 

•'A  public  trial,  trotted  according  to  the  rules  of  the  National  Trotting 
Association  for  governing  races,  and  timed  by  three  judges,  selected  in 
the  usual  way  by  any  Association,  a  member  in  good  standing  of  the  Na- 
tional Trotting  Association,  shall  be  considered  a  record  so  far  as  eligi- 
bility to  entry  in  this  Stud  Book  is  concerned.  A  certificate,  giving  the 
time    made    under   the   above    conditions,    must   be   signed    by    the    three 


12 

judges  and  countersigned  by  the  President  and  Secretary  of  the  Associa- 
tion authorizing  said  trial  ;  such  certificate  to  accompany  the  entry,  and 
remain  on  file." 

It  is  only  necessary  to  quote  these  rules  to  show  how 
much  better  guarded  our  trial  is  from  fraudulent  practices 
than  is  the  technical  record. 

That  an  Association  which  pretends  to  be  so  violently 
opposed  to  betting,  should  cling  to  the  dogma  that  a  wager 
is  the  only  test  of  honesty,  is  surprising.  It  is  evident  that 
the  gentlemen  are  a  little  ashamed  of  this,  for  they  proceed 
in  their  address  to  say: 

"In  insisting  upon  a  technical  record,  your  Committee 
"acted  more  with  reference  to  the  present  than  the  future. 
«*x;*H<  ***  There  will  be  ample  time  to  con- 
"sider  and  determine  whether  it  is  desirable  to  admit  a  pub- 
"lic  trial  in  lieu  of  the  technical  record."  (Think  of  that!) 
>K  *  *  *  '•  jf  such  trials  are  allowed,  they  will  have  to 
"take  place  under  the  jurisdtctto7i  and  control  o(  this  Asso- 
"  elation."     *     *     *     *     =K     *     *     «     *     * 

When  we  consider  that  this  Association  neither  owns 
nor  controls  one  single  track  in  the  whole  land,  we  catch  its 
drift.  It  must  be  a  jurisdiction  and  control  in  a  Pickwickian 
sense  that  is  meant. 

In  conclusion,  we  will  state  that,  whether  or  not  we  pub- 
lished a  Stud  Book,  the  evil — if  it  is  an  evil — that  much 
stock  is  "ostracised  "  has  already  been  accomplished  by  the 
publication  of  the  two  sets  of  rules,  and  the  discussion  that 
has  been  caused  thereby.  The  public  has  learned  how  the 
value  of  trotting  horses  is  estimated  by  practical  men,  and 
the  lesson  will  not  be  forgotten.  That  sotne  good  may 
also  be  the  result,  a  Stud  Book  will  be  compiled  and  pub- 
lished under  the  rules  as  announced  by  us  ;  and  in  order  to 
make  this  book  complete,  all  eligible  animals,  whose  pedi- 
grees can  be  established,  will  be  recorded  without  fee. 


13 

Mr.  Le  Grand  Lucas,  finding  that  the  work,  on  the  scale 
now  proposed,  would  require  too  much  of  his  time  to  prop- 
erly inform  himself,  has  asked  to  be  relieved. 

Mr.  y.  H.  Sanders,  the  Editor  of  the  ''Chicago  Live  Stock 
Journal,''  will  compile  and  edit  the  work,  and  communica- 
tions on  the  subject  should  be  addressed  to  him  at  the 
"Lakeside  Building,  Chicago,  Illindis." 

A.  J.   ALEXANDER,  of  Woodburn, 
R.  WEST,  of  Edge  Hill, 
J.  C.  McFERRAN,  V"  <^/^?^  V^ew, 
R.  S.  VEECH,  of  Indian  Hill, 
H.  C.  McDowell,  of  Woodlake, 
L.  BRODHEAD,  of  Woodburn, 

Comviittee  on  Rides. 


'4 


APPENDIX. 


Rules  for  Entry  in  the  Breeders'  Trotting  Stud  Book. 

The  object  of  this  book  is  to  preserve  a  reliable  record  of  the  pedigrees 
of  all  trotting  horses  that  have  trotted  a  mile  in  tvi^o  minutes  and  thirty 
seconds  (2:30)  or  better;  or  that  trace,  directly  or  collaterally,  to  such 
horses  under  the  conditions  hereinafter  mentioned. 

Harness,  team  or  saddle  records  of  2:30  or  better,  will  entitle  animals 
to  entry. 

Any  animal  coming  within  the  provisions  of  any  of  the  following  rules 
will  be  entitled  to  entry  : 

Rule  I.  Any  stallion,  mare,  or  gelding  that  has  a  record  of  two  minutes 
and  thirty  seconds  (2:30)  or  better. 

Rule  II.  Any  stallion  that  has  sired  a  horse,  mare,  or  gelding  with  a 
record  of  two  minutes  and  thirty  seconds  (2:30)  or  better. 

Rule  III,  Any  mare  that  has  produced  a  horse,  mare,  or  gelding  with  a 
record  of  two  minutes  and  thirty  seconds  (2:30)  or  better. 

Rule  IV,  Any  mare,  the  dam  of  any  stallion  or  mare  that  has  sired  or 
produced  a  horse,  mare,  or  gelding  with  a  record  of  two  minutes  and 
thirty  seconds  (2:30)  or  better;  provided  said  mare  was  by  a  stallion 
or  out  of  a  mare  entered  in  this  book. 

Rule  V,  Any  animal  by  a  stallion,  entered  in  this  Stud  Book,  out  of  a 
mare  entered  therein. 

Rule  VI.  Any  animal  whose  sire  and  whose  first  and  second  dams'  sires 
are  entered  in  this  Stud  BooV. 


15 


Bules  for  Entry  in  the  National  Association  of  Trotting 
Horse  Breeders'  Stud  Book. 

In  order  to  define  what  constitutes  a  trotting-bred  horse,  and  to  estab- 
lish a  BREED  of  trotters  on  a  more  intelligent  basis,  the  following  rules  are 
adopted  to  control  admission  to  the  records  of  pedigrees.  When  an  ani- 
mal meets  the  requirements  of  admission,  and  is  duly  registered,  it  shall 
be  accepted  as  a  standard  trotting-bred  animal. 

First. — Any  stallion  that  has,  himself,  a  record  of  two  minutes  and  thirty 
seconds  (2:30)  or  better;  provided  any  of  his  get  has  a  record  of  2:40  or 
better;  or,  provided  his  sire  or  dam,  his  grandsire  or  his  grandam,  is 
already  a  standard  animal. 

Second. — Any  mare  or  gelding  that  has  a  record  of  2:30  or  better. 

Third. — Any  horse  that  is  the  sire  of  two  animals  with  a  record  of  2:30 
or  better. 

Fourth. — Any  horse  that  is  the  sire  of  one  animal  with  a  record  of  2:30 
or  better;  provided  he  has  either  of  the  following  additional  qualifica- 
tions : 

1.  A  record,  himself,  of  2:40  or  better. 

2.  Is  the  sire  of  two  other  animals  with  a  record  of  2:40  or  better. 

3.  Has  a  sire  or  dam,  grandsire  or  grandam,  that  is  already  a  standard 
animal. 

Fifth. — Any  mare  that  has  produced  an  animal  with  a  record  of  2:30  or 
better. 

Sixth. — ^The  progeny  of  a  standard  horse  when  out  of  a  standard  mare. 

Seventh. — The  progeny  of  a  standard  horse  when  out  of  a  mare  by  a 
standard  horse. 

Eighth. — The  progeny  of  a  standard  horse  when  out  of  a  mare  whose 
dam  is  a  standard  mare. 

Ninth. — Any  mare  that  has  a  record  of  2:40  or  better,  and  whose  sire  or 
dam,  grandsire  or  grandam,  is  a  standard  animal. 

Tenth. — A  record  to  wagon  of  2:35  or  better  shall  be  regarded  as  equal 
to  a  2:30  record. 


